For years, predictions of the “death of the office” have cycled through business pages with varying levels of credibility.

According to GoTo’s latest Pulse of Work in 2025 survey, over half of employees – 51 percent – believe AI will eventually make physical offices obsolete.

It’s a striking headline, but one that deserves interrogation.

Can survey sentiment be translated into actionable strategy for CIOs and CFOs deciding how to allocate millions in IT budgets and real estate costs? Or is this another case of workplace wishful thinking?

The report, conducted with Workplace Intelligence, canvassed 2,500 employees and IT leaders in ten markets (USA, Canada, the UK, Ireland, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, India, Mexico and Brazil).

That breadth gives the research some heft, but it also raises questions: do respondents in high-density cities like Mumbai or São Paulo view office necessity differently than workers in suburban North America?

And how might cultural or regulatory differences influence attitudes toward remote work and AI adoption?

Reading Between the Numbers

The data suggests a strong belief in AI’s positive impact:

• 62 percent of employees say they’d prefer AI-enhanced remote work to office life.
• 71 percent cite work-life balance improvements.
• 66 percent believe AI makes them equally productive anywhere.
• 65 percent say AI helps them serve customers better remotely.

These numbers are compelling, but sentiment doesn’t always equal outcomes.

Productivity gains attributed to AI are difficult to measure independently, and much depends on the definition of “AI.”

Does an automated helpdesk count? A predictive scheduling assistant? A generative AI tool summarising meetings? The term itself risks becoming a catch-all for digitalisation.

There’s also a potential sample bias: respondents are evenly split between remote, hybrid, and on-site workers, but those with positive AI experiences may be more inclined to participate enthusiastically.

Enterprises should therefore view the statistics as directional, not definitive.

The IT Leader/Employee Disconnect

One of the most telling (and troubling) findings in the report is the gulf between leaders and staff – 91 percent of IT leaders believe their organisation uses AI effectively to support remote teams, but only 53 percent of employees agree.

This gap suggests that while IT leaders are satisfied with deployments, end-users find them less impactful.

That has implications for ROI, as an underused tool represents sunk cost.

This disconnect also highlights a risk often glossed over in surveys: the change management challenge.

Buying AI tools is the easy part, but embedding them into everyday workflows is far harder.

For CIOs, this should be a red flag. If employees are unconvinced, then AI becomes just another layer of technology – tolerated rather than embraced.

Generational Enthusiasm – Or Just Adaptation?

The survey reports that adoption spans all ages: 90 percent of Gen Z, 84 percent of Millennials, 71 percent of Gen X, and 74 percent of Boomers cite productivity gains from AI.

While impressive, one might question whether these figures reflect genuine efficiency or simple adaptation to new tools.

Older workers may not be “embracing” AI as much as learning to cope with it.

Without more granular data – e.g., are they saving measurable hours, or just tolerating a chatbot instead of a helpdesk call? – the headline percentages could risk overstating the universality of AI’s benefits.

The Economics of Perks vs. Platforms

Perhaps the most actionable finding is that 61 percent of employees want investment in AI over office amenities.

For CFOs weighing where to allocate budgets, this could justify diverting funds from underutilised real estate or perks into digital infrastructure.

Yet here too, nuance is needed as preferences don’t necessarily translate into performance.

If AI spend is seen as a trade-off against office culture or collaboration, could organisations risk long-term erosion of engagement? And how should CFOs model the return on investment from AI tools that may reduce support costs but increase licensing fees?

The Real Questions for Buyers

For CIOs, CFOs, and HR leaders, the survey may prove informative and reveals where employee sentiment lies, but not necessarily where the business case stands.

Decision-makers will need to interrogate:

• ROI Validity: What measurable productivity gains does AI actually deliver compared to cost outlay?
• Security & Compliance: Are AI tools being evaluated for GDPR, HIPAA, or sector-specific risks?
• Scalability: Can solutions scale across regions with different regulatory and cultural contexts?
• Change Management: How can enterprises close the perception gap between IT leaders and employees?
• Hybrid Trade-Offs: Will heavy AI investment reduce the role of offices, or will offices remain critical for creativity, onboarding, and sensitive discussions?

Before making multi-million dollar decisions, leaders must see beyond the buzz and ask if their AI strategy actually aligns with broader business goals and long-term organisational culture.